[NewMusic] acoustic vs. electronic

Barry Threw bthrew at gmail.com
Tue Jan 9 14:06:28 PST 2007 

I agree wholeheartedly about the meeting of electronic and acoustic 
instruments bringing about a new type of language.  However I would go 
even further to suggest that rather than forcing a situation where two 
somehow opposed forces of acoustic and electric "deal with each other", 
what is more interesting is a marriage of the two paradigms.  What is 
needed is acoustically informed electronic instruments that allow the 
virtuosity of classical tradition to be leveraged with the new 
possibilities from electronic sounds and control.  Instruments that 
bridge the gap between traditional and experimental, and  thus create a 
seemless interface to this new electronic world are important as a 
bridge to the open sound world of computer music.

All of these issues are really matters of interface.  The electronic / 
acoustic divide is not  an abstraction that I find particularly 
helpful...everything is acoustic before it gets to your ear.  The real 
divide is between traditional interface and non-traditional interface, 
and between a limited set of sounds vs a theoretically unlimited set of 
sounds.  We are still using instruments  that were in a mostly finished 
form 250 years ago!  These instruments are only somewhat informed by the 
tools and aesthetics of our times, they are mostly the same instruments 
that were used in a culture entirely removed from ours.

I think a lot of this anti-electronic sentiment you speak of can be 
(and is!) just as easily applied to acoustic musicians.

There is a proliferation of ALL kinds of music right now...everything is 
overbearing, but you are right in the fact that there will continue to 
be more and more electronic music, and less and less acoustic.  The tide 
of technological innovation is something that can't be stopped, and it 
will eventually push all the instruments that all of us hold dear into 
obsolesce.  Not in our lifetimes perhaps, but some day.

One of the major issues with electronic musicians is that a lot of the 
time we are instrument builders, possibly more than composers (at any 
rate its inexorably linked).  The carries the weight of a whole 
different set of values along with it than composition alone on a 
predefined instrument.  The long time separated roles of instrument 
building, performing, composition, and listening are becoming melded by 
  technology.  As I said before, when instrument building / composing 
interface becomes your primary concern.  Interface many times IS the 
composition, it defines what sounds you can make and how you can make 
them just as much as any underlying engine.

b


Jacob Lindsay wrote:
> I think the meeting of acoustic and electronic
> instruments is one of the most exciting things
> happening in music right now, as it forces each set to
> deal with the other and thus expands everyone's
> vocabulary.
> 
> A lot of the anti-electronic sentiment I've heard (and
> even expressed, oops) has been towards those musicians
> (vague general group, no one in particular) who pick
> up a laptop or effects pedal and obviously haven't put
> much work into the music.  They just buy some cool
> electronic gear and then jump on stage (look I'm a
> musician!).  The same could be said about a lot of DJs
> "Look, I can play a record!"  However, I don't think
> anyone is criticizing the real electronic musicians
> out there (those who have put the time in to master
> their instruments and are making good music).
> 
> The other thing is the proliferation of electronic
> music.  There is so much of it right now it can get a
> bit overbearing.  Plus, a lot of acoustic players are
> also now doubling on electronic instruments, or
> modifying their acoustic sounds electronically
> (close-micing, feedback tenor, etc.).  I actually just
> went through a week in which I decided I was going to
> listen to only purely acoustic music (no electronics
> at all), just to remind myself that such a thing still
> exists.
> 
> 
> --- kristin miltner <miltnerunit at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> matt, i cannot tell if you're defending me or making
>> fun of me, i love that
>> about you.
>>
>>> i can't even ~imagine~ how awesome my max
>> patch[**] would be if i spent
>>> even 1% as many years building it as i have spent
>> practicing my clarinet.
>>> [** really a Csound instrument, not some silly max
>> patch! ]
>>
>> yeah matt, you're right on, that's what i'm talking
>> about,
>> ....um, thanks.
>> does that answer you question, weasel?
>> silly kristin, max patches are for kids, try some
>> real code and a real
>> instrument, right?
>>
>> it is true matt plays a real instrument very very
>> very well and programs in
>> c sound, and i am a lowly max/msp, vocals and
>> samples kid.
>>
>> k
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/8/07, Matt J. Ingalls <ingalls at mills.edu>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Maybe this is the exact kind of comment you are
>> talking about, but:
>>> i can't even ~imagine~ how awesome my max
>> patch[**] would be if i spent
>>> even 1% as many years building it as i have spent
>> practicing my clarinet.
>>> [** really a Csound instrument, not some silly max
>> patch! ]
>>> Then again, some of my most enjoyable improvised
>> computer music
>>> performances has just been moving a single slider!
>>>
>>> -m
>>>
>>> On Mon, 8 Jan 2007, kristin miltner wrote:
>>>
>>>>> That's another gap that lots of us would like
>> to close, and have tried
>>>>> to close - the gap between acoustic and
>> electronic instruments. It's
>>>>> been a very rewarding pursuit, mostly because
>> it has forced me to think
>>>>> like an electronic instrument.
>>>> it's nice to hear that -- sometimes i sense an
>> 'acoustic is more legit
>>> than
>>>> electronic' vibe -- it has to do with
>> traditional 'chops' on a guitar or
>>>> other acoustic instrument being a pretty
>> accessible, very visible
>>> standard,
>>>> vs. the less measurable 'chops' on your laptop,
>> which have to do with
>>> some
>>>> vague idea of the software you built and how
>> complex the live processing
>>> is.
>>>> are people just suspicious since they can't
>> obseve it as directly?
>>>> i get that acoustic vs. computer feeling WAY
>> more than a 'men are more
>>> legit
>>>> musicians than women' vibe but that could be
>> just me being insecure.
>>>> i think in some cases i listen better when i am
>> playing with acoustic
>>>> musicians, because i tend to focus on taking in
>> their sound and working
>>> with
>>>> that as raw material. the improvisation is
>> unified by that process. +
>>> i'm
>>>> not just talking about a max patch that's
>> basically a fancy delay pedal
>>>> someone blows into (although on the other hand
>> simple tools can procuce
>>>> beautiful results). i have to rebuild a patch to
>> really interact with
>>>> someone and each patch is very tuned to the
>> specific person i play with;
>>> it
>>>> has to be!
>>>> it's really hard the more people you have in the
>> mix.
>>>> when mike perlmutter's group radiolaria used to
>> play a lot, our
>>> rehearsals
>>>> really educated me about what kind of a player i
>> was....when i deferred
>>> to
>>>> others, when i wanted to be heard, when i mowed
>> over someone else's
>>> delicate
>>>> thing....
>>>> when i play with another laptop musician
>> sometimes it feel competitive
>>>> instead of cooprative. we are often stacking and
>> layering, not really
>>>> incorporating each other as a source the same
>> way.
>>>> k
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/8/07, Phillip Greenlief <
>> pgsaxo at pacbell.net> wrote:
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> On Behalf Of kristin miltner
>>>>> Subject: Re: [NewMusic] WAS: Re: improvised
>> music - gender & money
>>>>> NOW:Re:???
>>>>>
>>>>> i find the bay area very accommodating;  i
>> can't complain.
>>>>> PG:
>>>>> Glad to hear it.
>>>>>
>>>>> KM:
>>>>> i don't
>>>>> often participate in that, because it's just
>> difficult to work my
>>>>> instrument
>>>>> into a group of improvisationalists -- not that
>> i don't enjoy doing
>>> that
>>>>> once in a while, it's very challenging and i
>> play my max patches
>>>>> entirely
>>>>> differently.
>>>>>
>>>>> PG:
>>>>> That's another gap that lots of us would like
>> to close, and have tried
>>>>> to close - the gap between acoustic and
>> electronic instruments. It's
>>>>> been a very rewarding pursuit, mostly because
>> it has forced me to think
>>>>> like an electronic instrument.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Bay Area New Music Discussion Group
>>>>> NewMusic at music.mills.edu
>>>>>
>> http://music.mills.edu/mailman/listinfo/newmusic
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Bay Area New Music Discussion Group
>>>> NewMusic at music.mills.edu
>>>> http://music.mills.edu/mailman/listinfo/newmusic
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bay Area New Music Discussion Group
>>> NewMusic at music.mills.edu
>>> http://music.mills.edu/mailman/listinfo/newmusic
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bay Area New Music Discussion Group
>> NewMusic at music.mills.edu
>> http://music.mills.edu/mailman/listinfo/newmusic
>>
> 
> 
> Jacob Lindsay
> http://www.bayimproviser.com/artistdetail.asp?artist_id=44
> http://www.myspace.com/mryellowcake
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> _______________________________________________
> Bay Area New Music Discussion Group
> NewMusic at music.mills.edu
> http://music.mills.edu/mailman/listinfo/newmusic
> 

-- 
barry threw
composition : sound : programming
http://www.barrythrew.com
bthrew(at)gmail(dot)com
857-544-3967

(if you would see the stars clearly,
look hard at the surrounding darkness)
		-Ooka Makoto

More information about the NewMusic mailing list